Friday, May 20, 2016

For Democrats What Happened in Vegas Won't Stay in Vegas.

There is nothing even handed about rigging and perverting democracy. And that is exactly what happened at the Nevada state Democratic Convention. But in the interests of being as even handed as possible, the videos here showing and describing what happened at the convention are two of the more lower key even handed explanations and presentations of facts, not emotion though its fair to say the outrage expressed by Sanders voters both at the convention and watching online is totally justifiable.

Sanders voters have every right to be outraged at what happened and outraged at Roberta Lange, who you will see in even the most even  handed objective light, presided over the convention like a corrupt member of the Politburo complete with her lacky behind her trying to get the crowd to support voice votes in what amounted to a one sided Hillary Clinton rigged convention. People can watch the videos and make up their own minds.

But there is not the slightest doubt the Nevada State Democratic Convention was rigged for Hillary Clinton by party chair Roberta Lange who is clearly a puppet carrying out marching orders from Debby Wasserman-Schultz in collusion with the Clinton campaign. And this is going to have far ranging repercussions for the Democratic party. It's not going to stay at the Paris Hotel in Las Vegas. The DNC can expect it to make its way to Philadelphia. And if they try and do anything to suppress it and the Clinton rigging continues that outrage will find its way to a place where outrage is best expressed, at the ballot box in November.

The Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz have been courting disaster for months with their rigging, cheating, lying and blatant voter fraud in at least 6 states. Not to mention Clinton's serial lying about Sanders record on guns and the auto bailout,her stealing Sanders positions and their fraud and dirty campaign tricks with super delegates all of which reached the boiling point in Nevada and they have no one but themselves to blame.

The dishonest news coverage of what happened have only made things worse for the DNC and Clinton. Dishonest pandering journalists like Erica Werner and Ken Thomas at AP and all the usual suspects on cable news, the useless Wolf Blitzer, Gloria Borger,Jeff Zeleny,John King  and the rest of the gang at CNN, Andrea Mitchell, Maddow, Chris Hayes and the rest at MSNBC, clearly in the tank for the Democratic party establishment,virtually ignored the rigging and focused on the reaction, more interested in not offending or upsetting their establishment political contacts.

It has been clear that the Democratic party and everyone associated with it have been hell bent on rigging the nomination for Hillary Clinton from the beginning and the fix was in from the start. Sanders was the wild card they never saw coming, an honest politician whose honesty and integrity and penchant for actually meaning what he says continues to befuddle them leaving them helpless over how to deal with him because most are so used to lying and dodging the truth and talking out of both sides of their mouths themselves in a world where "everybody does it" they assumed he was like they are and because he isnt, have no answer on how to handle Sanders and his voters who refuse to go along with their games.

And so they do the next best thing. They've resorted to cheating, lying, rigging and fraud to win. And somehow are stupid enough to think they will get away with it or paper over it with empty denials.

What happened at the Nevada convention was the kind of rigging of the democratic process that was commonplace at Tammany Hall and Boss Tweed in the 1850's. Except back then there was no Internet, no cell phone video, no social media and no one willing to talk. It did have some crusading journalists who tried to expose the fraud something completely missing today.

Instead we have corrupt party line journalists like Gloria Borger,Wolf Blitzer,Andrea Mitchell and others who turn a blind eye to what happened as a wink to their friends and contacts in power. Adding to it was a journalistic hack in Nevada named Jon Ralston who seems to have made his living as a journalistic water boy for the Democratic machine in Las Vegas. He supposedly was the source of a myriad of dishonest reports and tweets from the convention picked up by the usual collection of lazy mainstream journalists. Among the bogus reports was Ralston's wrong headed assertion that Sanders supporters threw chairs. Celebrity supporters of Clinton, equally ignorant and relying on false reports like Cher, parroted the report of chair throwing which Debby Wasserman-Schultz also parroted on MSNBC. There was no video to confirm it but a video of a man picking up a chair then putting it down was used by media to justify the chair throwing and picked up by equally dishonest journalists.

These are journalists who  have tried to reduce the complaints of Sanders voters to "conspiracy theories"  as Gloria Borger on CNN termed them, while turning their blind eye to fraud and dirty tricks that have been going on from the beginning, not even so much ignoring as colluding. Like super delegates who haven't voted in 32 years declaring for Clinton in February with non-binding at the moment "preferences" which not only count for nothing unless and until they are cast at the convention but have nothing to do with the 2383 in pledged delegates a candidate must win to gain the nomination through primaries.

It is only if and when that number cannot be met  (and Clinton will not meet it) that super delegates would be asked to vote. Something they havent done in 32 years but which CNN reporters like John King, Jeff Zelney, Wolf Blitzer and at MSNBC Chris Hayes, the over rated Rachel Maddow and Steve Kornacki  all ignore even when informed of the facts and the actual DNC rules.

They keep referring to Clinton's lead as "insurmountable" when the truth is her actual delegate lead is 280 with about 800 delegates still to be won, almost 500 alone in California.

When Jeff Weaver, Sanders campaign manager appeared with Wolf Blitzer, he questioned  Weaver for almost 15 minutes on trivia, like an angry phone call made by one of the Sanders supporters at the convention to Roberta Lange who helped rig the convention,asking  Weaver if he or Sanders owed Lange an apology for Sanders supporters getting angry.

Blitzer never once asked about or investigated the fraud that took place. CNN didn't book one guest or interview one Sanders supporter who was there not even former Ohio State senator Nina Turner who had appeared before on CNN, to ask what actually happened. Instead Blitzer characterized the phone call as " making threats against Lange's life" when it was no such thing. It was nasty, it  was angry, it berated Lange deservedly for her Politburo performance and yes the caller wished bad things on her but never once made a threat to take any action against her. What was said in that phone call could only be called a threat if Blitzer believed in voodoo. And maybe he does.

Blitzer also made an issue of Wasserman-Schultz statement that Sanders reaction to what happened was "totally unacceptable". Sanders for his part has refused to back down and refused to cave in to Blitzer's or Wasserman-Schultz's kow towing suggestion he should apologize. The only people who owe anyone an apology is Lange, the Democratic National Committee and CNN for their dishonest news coverage.

People are angry and they are going to stay angry. Dianne Feinstein is already invoking Chicago 1968 which has been brought up here a few times. And the Democratic National Committee can expect tens of thousands, maybe even hundreds of thousands of Sanders supporters in Philadelphia for the convention to protest their dishonesty and fraud.

There is no reason to expect violence or for people like Feinstein who is clearly ignorant about history, to compare it to Chicago '68 based on the violence that took place there.The violence in Chicago in 1968 wasn't caused by protestors but by police.

Chicago in 1968 saw tens of  thousands of protestors, mostly young, the same age as many Sanders voters,  showing up to protest the Viet Nam war which was being conducted by a Democratic administration. The protests were all peaceful. The violence was started by the Chicago police and a Justice Dept investigation months after the event termed what had happened as a "police riot", Chicago police out of control and who were the sole perpetrators of and instigators of the violence.

There is no reason to think Philadelphia police would riot and be the cause of violence.  Naturally they have a duty to preserve the peace. But while there is every reason to expect hundreds of thousands of Sanders voters to show up to make their voices heard both inside the convention and out with signs and demonstrations, there is not the slightest reason to expect violence. So far the only real violence was perpetrated by a Clinton supporter, actor Wendell Pierce who was charged with assaulting a woman when he found out she was a Sanders supporter.

What the DNC can be sure of is if  they carry out their plan to hand Hillary Clinton the nomination in a process that reeks of the kind of fraud and dishonesty that's been seen from the beginning, if there is anything similar to Nevada its going to get ugly. Not violent. Ugly. Ugly for Clinton. Ugly for Democrats. And Ugly in November.

There was a chant at the Democratic convention in 1968 as the police cracked down and tried to silence the protestors, a chant that echoed around the world and a chant that will probably be heard in Philadelphia. The chant was,"the whole worlds watching".

Its something Debby Wasserman - Schultz, Hillary Clinton, the DNC and super delegates aiding and abetting the fraud ought to keep in mind. They've been committing fraud and perverting the democratic process from the beginning and the whole world will be watching again in Philadelphia. And  if there is anything in Philadelphia similar to what happened in Nevada they are going to be looking at a massive defeat in November, which also happened in 1968, since that is the best way to clean house and rid the Democratic party of the kind of blatant corruption and fraud that everyone has been seeing. And replace it in two years with  Democratic candidates who are more honest.

Ed Rendall, a Clinton supporter recently scolded Sanders supporters that they better behave themselves at the convention. Like everything else the DNC has done, he has it backwards. Its the Democratic National Committee who better behave themselves. And its going to start in June when neither Clinton nor Sanders will have the requisite 2383 pledged delegates and no super delegate will have actually cast a ballot. If Wasserman-Schultz acts like Roberta Lange and declares Clinton the "presumptive nominee" without a single vote being cast at the convention she and the DNC will have no one to blame but themselves for what happens at the convention and beyond. Which is going to do the Democratic party no good. They have three months to stop their fraud and get it right.


Alessandro Machi said...

You are so pedantic. As I recall Hillary Clinton actually won the original caucus. Then Sanders filed some kind of lawsuit and the results were adjusted so he barely won. Then they had their final tally and some of Sander's people didn't qualify because they were independents or ringers.
Now you harp on about the super delegates. Who cares. The biggest lead Barack Obama ever had over Hillary Clinton in 2008 was 90 pledged delegates, and I think the final tally was 59.
The difference between 90 delegates in 2008 and 280 delegates in 2016 is INSURMOUNTABLE.

Marc Rubin said...

" As I recall Hillary Clinton actually won the original caucus"

Actually your recall is faulty.Clinton didnt " win" the orginal caucus they caught her cheating though they called it a mistake and miraculously a 5 pt. Clinton "win" turned in a 5 pt. Sanders legitimate win.

"Now you harp on about the super delegates. Who cares. The biggest lead Barack Obama ever had over Hillary Clinton in 2008 was 90 pledged delegates, and I think the final tally was 59.
The difference between 90 delegates in 2008 and 280 delegates in 2016 is INSURMOUNTABLE"

No one expects anyone who doesnt care about democracy and truth to care about the super delegate fraud. Try taking a walk through Arlington National Cemetary and see if you still want to say " who cares"? Maybe you will.

Youre also not too good at math. A 280 delegate lead with 800 delegates still at large is insurmountable only to the mathematically, logically and ethically infirm. And when you figure in logically that all of her 369 delegates in the red state south and in states Democrats will lose for sure and that she has them only because of Obama;s endorsement. Without Obama getting out the vote for her Clinton would never have those 369 delegates and 4 million votes and without them she is significantly behind Sanders in votes and delegates in the rest of the country. You also ignore Sanders has won 20 states outright and tied in 4 more. Meaning if he wins or ties in 2 more states he will have won more than half the country with six of Clinton's states red atates that she won only because of Obama.

And lets not forget your candidate using the assassination of RFK to justify her staying in the race till June in 2008 because, you know, anything can happen.Like her opponent getting shot.While she tries to pressure Sanders to get out of the race. Which will never happen. I'll have more to say about Clinton's RFK assassination justification to stay in the race till end another time.

But most of this is moot. Clinton will never win the presidency. Sanders voters will never vote for her given the only way she can get the nomination is by the same fraud cheating and lies she's been using from the beginning. And the recent DNC attacks on Sanders voters has so outraged all of them there is no way they are voting for Clinton. Its the Democrats party and they can do what they want with it. So can Sanders voters and as this winds down its clear that if Sanders doesnt get the nom which is still possible if he wins California, the Democrats are on track to lose in November.

Alessandro Machi said...

Hillary Clinton has won 22 primaries, Sanders has won 9 primaries. Caucuses do not fairly reflect the will of the voters. The fact that you organized the Denver group in 2008 which was supposed to help Hillary Clinton sure looks suspicious now.
You're dredging up the Kennedy comment, which was made and forgotten, until the republican hacks brought it up and amplified it. Hillary Clinton was under much more duress for a candidate who at that time would not have been trailing if not for the Florida primary being manipulated by the republican legislature, that's how close she was. And of course, the caucus contests are where Obama got his lead over Hillary Clinton.
Sander's has lost the month of January, February, March and April in total pledged delegates. I think he finally managed to eeke out a total pledged delegate victory in May, although May was the month with the least amount of races compared to the four prior months.
As for Obama and the south, you just can't be serious. Sanders was hedging his bets in the caucus contests by spending vast amounts of money because the turnout is 90% LOWER than in primaries. Washington caucus went for Bernie, Washington Primary went for Hillary, because Hillary Clinton is more popular when people have all day to vote and have a voting precinct reasonably close by.
Free Education is a sham, 30% of all college students have abused either drugs or alcohol, and your candidate wants to attract the drug pushers onto campus by offering free tuition, is he nuts?
Sanders has spent 50 million dollars more than Hillary Clinton since the beginning of January 2016 and has 3 million less voters to show for it.
And Sanders voters are skewing the national polls by saying they will vote for Donald Trump if Hillary is running against him.

altor said...

The difference between Clinton and Trump, one being "phoney' and the other being "phonier" is negligible compared to the fact that they are both Liars, Corrupted and Colluded with the Dark Forces of Capitalist-Fascism that resemble descending, orgiastic, barbarian hordes! They have deviated the course of Democracy at home and abroad! You, all, hide behind a Nationalist pretense while pursuing Imperialistic aims. This, at a time when, "The Empire", having grown too complacent at its strongest point in its history is now risking the Unity and Health of its Nucleus, the USA. All the while, it's risking its own demise at the hands of selfish millionaires reaching for a place in history. Democracy? Well, that has lost its appeal for these tyrants bent on "burning" the Constitution while turning Justice into a smoke house for fast-food addicts!
The History of the USA is rich, read it and learn it, stop rewriting it with manufactured, convenient LIES!
And by the way, as per election's spending, if it's true what you're saying, Hillary has probably pocketed most of it, rather than spending it. She has the whole USA's political propaganda machine (Public and Private) at her service, FREE! WAKE UP, ROME IS BURNING, Feel the Bern!!!

Anonymous said...

You know, your moonbat commentary about Hillary Clinton and the DNC would be a lot more persuasive if you didn't make the same moonbat complaints about Obama and the DNC on behalf of Hillary Clinton in 2008. As I recall, you also predicted electoral disaster if Obama was chosen over Clinton.

So the inevitable conclusion is that you are the Dean Chambers of the left. You're wrong, consistently so, and not smart enough to understand that political parties are clubs that are constitutionally free to make their own rules and follow their own procedures.

You were wrong in 2008. You're wrong now. Why not join Chambers and start claiming you have unskewed polls, too

Marc Rubin said...

"You, all, hide behind a Nationalist pretense while pursuing Imperialistic aims."

youre right about a couple of things but imperialism isnt one of them not when China holds most of U.S. debt and owns Rockefeller Center. As for Clinton pocketing campaign contributions that is not her style. She is politically corrupt but doesnt steal money for herself, she has enough, but did use 99% of funds that were supposed to go to state Democratic parties for her own campaign.Which is bad enough.

Marc Rubin said...

? Anonymous said...
You know, your moonbat commentary about Hillary Clinton and the DNC would be a lot more persuasive if you didn't make the same moonbat complaints about Obama and the DNC on behalf of Hillary Clinton in 2008. As I recall, you also predicted electoral disaster if Obama was chosen over Clinton'

Youre right on all counts except your the moonbat and a very dumb and barely conscious one. If you think electing Obama wasnt a disaster for the Democratic party then you must be an abject failure in life. Thanks to Obama the Democrats suffered the worst defeat of any party in 80 years in the 2010 elections for his sell out on healthcare to the insurance companies and Democrats got wiped out again in the senate in 2014 because of his failed policies, sell outs, betrayals and reneging on every promise he ever made from promising to close Gitmo his first year, to passing a healthcare reform with a public option that he sold out and more. He is the worst most inept dishonest incompetent unqualified person the Democrats ever had as president and thanks to him and blind as moonbat people like you Republicans now have the biggest congressional majority since before WWII. So congratulations if you call that success. No wonder you want to remain anonymous.

As for the rest of your brain dead assessment, yes the same dirty politics that occurred in 2008 that I called out has been adopted by Clinton. It takes one to know one. And takes a village idiot not to see it.

Marc Rubin said...

"Hillary Clinton has won 22 primaries, Sanders has won 9 primaries."

Im sorry to see how much brain damage you have suffered. As of this writing Bernie Sanders has won 20 states outright and tied in 4 more giving him wins or ties in 24 of 44 states with 6 to go. If Clinton loses California and the other states except for New Jersey because its a closed primary the nomination is up for grabs assuming she is not named a target of an FBI investigation which may be the case based on the Inspector General report released today on her email server. And if she does lose 5 of the next 6 including California its going to be tough for Clinton to make a case especially since there was clear voter fraud in New York.

Its interesting to me that Clinton supporters, like she does, has to try and rely on lying and misrepresenting facts and reality but maybe thats part of the deal.

The final point is while Sanders has won 20 states and tied in 4 others out of 44 and will win the majority of states if he wins all but New Jersey including the country's biggest state in California, its still a fact that 4 million of Clinton's votes and 369 delegates came from the deep South that she won only because of Obama's intervention and nothing to do with her. Had Obama gotten out the vote for Sanders he wouldve won hers and his.So 369 of her delegates and 4 million votes are bogus -- they are Obama votes not hers. On top of that all those states are Red States than Democrats have little to no chance of winning. She is also losing to Trump in the latest polls while Sanders beats Trump by 15. The only hope Clinton has of getting the nomination is she doesnt get indicted or named as a target in the FBI investigation which I think she will, and hope super delegates are very very stupid politically and looking for a way to lose instead of a sure winner with Sanders.And being stupid is something political Democrats have shown in the past they are very good at being. But Sanders is clearly the better candidate, better for the country, better ideas and a stronger candidate and a sure winner against Trump.